-Is that the same Napoleon Brock?-How do people get on that list? It's pretty easy to blame somebody for sex offence and get away with it, even if it was a misunderstanding on your behalf... I know, I got somebody fired once.

maybe this is one of the reasons he wasn't invited back to be in zpz? besides being in p/o, etc.?

Before I'd jump to that conclusion I'd need more information. For one thing, when was the alleged rape? I didn't see that there.

It isn't difficult to get on a sex offender registry here in the states. They have put teenagers on it for taking pictures of themselves, parents on it for taking innocent pictures to share with grand parents, and most recently a guy is gonna be put on there once he's released for a charge related to imported Japanese comic books. It wouldn't surprise me if you could be, or someone is eventually, or has already been placed on it for polygamy, bestiality, tree fucking, getting a blow job in many a state where that still counts as sodomy, not to mention anal sex, not to mention homosexuality, or S&M. In some areas you can be arrested and will eventually wind up on a sex offender registry if you masturbate with anything other than a professionally manufactured marital aid. Ladies stop using carrots, cucumbers, zucchini, etc. In fact now a days it could get you a slot on sex offender registry if you CALL ANY VEGETABLE. As I recall, in Georgia it doesn't matter, they banned foreign objects so you could be a registered sex offender for owning a dildo. Dildo = foreign object. Fisting can get you in some states, so can making a video with your wife if you tie her up and fuck her, having her consent doesn't matter, the state will still charge you with depicting rape, even though no rape occurred. That's right, I'm not making this shit up. You can become a registered sex offender for having kinky sex with your wife. Come to think of it, I don't think I've ever met anyone over the age of let's say 25 who couldn't be a registered sex offender in the USA today. And really isn't that the entire point? If we all can be considered guilty of such a thing for no reason at all then we'll all shut up, sit down, and mind our place. We'll be afraid to dissent, because anyone could decide to punish us for no crime at all AAAFNRAA.

Does anyone have any more information with which we could come to an informed decision? I searched for anything on google, but couldn't find nothin'.

_________________"Whose foot is to be the measure to which ours are all to be cut or stretched? Is a priest to be our inquisitor, or shall a layman, simple as ourselves, set up his reason as the rule for what we are to read and what we must believe?" T.J.

In Illinois, which contributes to the D.O.J. list, you can only get on the sex offender list if you are arrested and convicted. You can't be put on it any other way. There are all kinds of sex abuse that can get you arrested, though. That's subject to state laws.

_________________Everytime we picked a booger we'd flip it on this one winduh. Every night we'd contribute, 2, 3, 4 boogers. We had to use a putty knife, man, to get them damn things off the winduh. There was some goober ones that weren't even hard...

In Illinois, which contributes to the D.O.J. list, you can only get on the sex offender list if you are arrested and convicted. You can't be put on it any other way. There are all kinds of sex abuse that can get you arrested, though. That's subject to state laws.

You need to be convicted, not guilty. There's a mighty big difference. Anyone who takes a plea and hopes for mercy is convicted, but may not be guilty. But more importantly how does importing a comic book equate to sex abuse? How does kinky sex with your wife equate to sex abuse? How does making a video of kinky sex with your wife equate to sex abuse? How does masturbation in any form equate to sex abuse? How does taking a picture of yourself masturbating equate to sex abuse? How does taking a picture of yourself no matter what age you are and no matter what you are doing equate to sex abuse? (This refers to the current trend of sexting, which teens have already been charged with the production of child pornography for and for which they face life as sex offenders) How does consensual anal sex equate to sex abuse? How does any form of consensual sex equate to sex abuse? People have been convicted in this country of all of these things, and more are facing similar charges right now. If convicted they will be placed on a sex offender registry, does that make them guilty of anything?

_________________"Whose foot is to be the measure to which ours are all to be cut or stretched? Is a priest to be our inquisitor, or shall a layman, simple as ourselves, set up his reason as the rule for what we are to read and what we must believe?" T.J.

When i was 18 i had sex with someone that was 17 would that make me a sex offender in the states?

Heads or Tails? If you took a picture or made a video for posterity you're gone, otherwise I'd give you 50/50 odds. Might depend on her parents, and the particular legal system you were going through, every state and jurisdiction is different.Currently there are many people such as yourself who are considered child sexual predators, and yes you would if convicted, whether she was willing or not, be placed for the rest of your life on a sex offender registry. I believe our current youngest registered sex offender is 14, but I might be mistaken. (I don't follow things religiously.) This is note worthy only because all of the laws state that someone so young is to young to be sexually active and therefore can not legally give consent to anyone for sexual purposes, but if they engage in sex with another minor they may be tried magically as an adult and given a prison sentence and become a registered sex offender. Essentially we have created a new class of human being, the asexual-child sex predator pre-pubescent offender. Again I couldn't make this shit up. We have currently pending or recently tried cases against pre-teens for sexual assault. What used to be called playing Dr. can now get you arrested.At 18, you are considered an adult, unless you want to go to an X rated movie in some states, or would like to drink a beer, then you are a child, but you can still get married to your 18 year old wife, but don't make a honeymoon video of yourselves fucking, then you would be guilty in those states where the legal age to be in anything pornographic is 21. If she's 17, and yes you can marry 17 year olds still in most states with a guardians permission and you take naked pictures of her, or make a home movie and someone finds out you could still be arrested for producing child pornography of your wife. But you are more than welcome to commit murder for your country, and then you can drink beer. I digress.

_________________"Whose foot is to be the measure to which ours are all to be cut or stretched? Is a priest to be our inquisitor, or shall a layman, simple as ourselves, set up his reason as the rule for what we are to read and what we must believe?" T.J.

this site is for people who've committed offences against minors and it says (2) meaning 2 counts. so they must have at least some evidence. they couldn't put him on the list without it.

not sure it's only for offences against minors; 261 is generic

california penal code 261 wrote:

... non-consensual intercourse with a woman accomplished by threats or force ...

... many innocent people are accused of rape, the reasons can include mistaken identification; a misunderstanding among the parties as to the issue of consent; and false accusations by a victim because of anger, jealousy or other ulterior motives ...

...defendant is not guilty of rape if he actually and reasonably believed that the woman consented to the intercourse; the people have the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant did not actually and reasonably believe that the woman consented, if the people have not met this burden, you must find the defendant not guilty

In Illinois, which contributes to the D.O.J. list, you can only get on the sex offender list if you are arrested and convicted. You can't be put on it any other way. There are all kinds of sex abuse that can get you arrested, though. That's subject to state laws.

You need to be convicted, not guilty. There's a mighty big difference.

Agreed. There are lots of ridiculous legal interpretations of sexual abuse. All I was saying is that a person can't get on the list on a whim. They had to commit and get convicted for the crime, however reasonable or stupid the law is. I can't just call up the police and complain about my neighbor's "sexual offense" and have him automatically go on the list.

Some of my work involves obtaining background checks. In Illinois, out of probably 500 people I've looked up on our registry, maybe 400 of them were convicted of being a child sex predator. Most of the other were found guilty of rape of an adult woman. I have no idea if Illinois' numbers are better or worse or different than other states, or how Illinois compares to the federal roster.

_________________Everytime we picked a booger we'd flip it on this one winduh. Every night we'd contribute, 2, 3, 4 boogers. We had to use a putty knife, man, to get them damn things off the winduh. There was some goober ones that weren't even hard...

All I was saying is that a person can't get on the list on a whim. They had to commit and get convicted for the crime, however reasonable or stupid the law is.

Understood, the point I was trying to make is that currently the activities that might constitute a sex crime are so wide ranging as to make everyone potentially prosecutable. Not every convict committed the crime they were convicted of, so it stands to reason they did not have to commit the crime.

Quote:

I can't just call up the police and complain about my neighbor's "sexual offense" and have him automatically go on the list.

No, they would have to be convicted first, or accept a plea bargain that involved inclusion on a sexual offender registry.

Quote:

Some of my work involves obtaining background checks. In Illinois, out of probably 500 people I've looked up on our registry, maybe 400 of them were convicted of being a child sex predator. Most of the other were found guilty of rape of an adult woman. I have no idea if Illinois' numbers are better or worse or different than other states, or how Illinois compares to the federal roster.

And I hope that the majority of them were actually guilty, I also hope those guilty of violent sex crimes are caught.

My issue is with those who have not committed a violent crime and are still placed on a sex offender registry. Or who have broken some law that shouldn't even be a law, or certainly shouldn't apply to the person in question. I don't believe teenagers should be classified as child sex predators for the rest of their lives for sleeping with their girl or boyfriend, or sending a picture to a classmate. I don't believe people should be classified as sex offenders for public nudity. (I forgot to mention that one earlier.) I don't believe people should be classified as sex offenders for the books they read, movies they watch, pictures they look at, paintings, drawings, or words they write. I'm not a supporter of the thought crime acceptability movement. All of these come under the heading of Habeas Corpus IMO.

Also I see this as an issue of division and isolation of the populace, in other words social engineering to maintain a corporate/governmental power structure. The ultimate point isn't that you can't get your neighbor placed on a list, the ultimate point is that you thought about your neighbor as someone who might be a sex offender at all.

_________________"Whose foot is to be the measure to which ours are all to be cut or stretched? Is a priest to be our inquisitor, or shall a layman, simple as ourselves, set up his reason as the rule for what we are to read and what we must believe?" T.J.

In Illinois, which contributes to the D.O.J. list, you can only get on the sex offender list if you are arrested and convicted. You can't be put on it any other way. There are all kinds of sex abuse that can get you arrested, though. That's subject to state laws.

You need to be convicted, not guilty. There's a mighty big difference. Anyone who takes a plea and hopes for mercy is convicted, but may not be guilty. But more importantly how does importing a comic book equate to sex abuse? How does kinky sex with your wife equate to sex abuse? How does making a video of kinky sex with your wife equate to sex abuse? How does masturbation in any form equate to sex abuse? How does taking a picture of yourself masturbating equate to sex abuse? How does taking a picture of yourself no matter what age you are and no matter what you are doing equate to sex abuse? (This refers to the current trend of sexting, which teens have already been charged with the production of child pornography for and for which they face life as sex offenders) How does consensual anal sex equate to sex abuse? How does any form of consensual sex equate to sex abuse? People have been convicted in this country of all of these things, and more are facing similar charges right now. If convicted they will be placed on a sex offender registry, does that make them guilty of anything?

it says 2 counts of rape by force on a site that deals with child abuse specifically, that's not kinky sex with your wife. They were quite specific about the charges. There are no dates against any of the names on the list on that site.

this site is for people who've committed offences against minors and it says (2) meaning 2 counts. so they must have at least some evidence. they couldn't put him on the list without it.

not sure it's only for offences against minors; 261 is generic

california penal code 261 wrote:

... non-consensual intercourse with a woman accomplished by threats or force ...

... many innocent people are accused of rape, the reasons can include mistaken identification; a misunderstanding among the parties as to the issue of consent; and false accusations by a victim because of anger, jealousy or other ulterior motives ...

...defendant is not guilty of rape if he actually and reasonably believed that the woman consented to the intercourse; the people have the burden of proving beyond a reasonable doubt that the defendant did not actually and reasonably believe that the woman consented, if the people have not met this burden, you must find the defendant not guilty

yeah the penal code 261 is generic for assault by force, however the website listing the entry deals specifically with child sex offenders. It tells you that in the organisation's profile.

My wife remembers things more clearly than I do sometimes. After reading my prior posts she reminded me that the youngest person on the national sex offender registry is not 14 years of age. The youngest person ever placed on the USA national sex offender registry was 6 (SIX) years of age for assault on his 5 year old neighbor. I am not sure if he remains or if some sense of human decency finally prevailed.

_________________"Whose foot is to be the measure to which ours are all to be cut or stretched? Is a priest to be our inquisitor, or shall a layman, simple as ourselves, set up his reason as the rule for what we are to read and what we must believe?" T.J.

At no place on the website in question do I see any indication that they solely and specifically deal with child sex predators. (Please point me to where you found this.) Further there is no mention of any offense against a minor anywhere in regards to the charges against Napoleon Murphy Brock that I could find. Further I still have no details as to when the charges stem from, who the victim(s) in the case were, if he went to trial or took a plea, etc. But he obviously isn't incarcerated at this time, as he just performed with The Grandmothers at Zappanale. So even if he is guilty, and he may be, it doesn't really matter as he has most likely paid his debt to society, and now gets to begin again.

Sorry, I know I'm supposed to engage in an involuntary programmed response, something along the lines of hatred, disgust, revulsion and murderous rage for the man. It's just not going to happen, perhaps I don't watch Nancy Grace and America's Most Wanted enough. Perhaps I just don't believe that any one thing is the entire summation of a human existence.

_________________"Whose foot is to be the measure to which ours are all to be cut or stretched? Is a priest to be our inquisitor, or shall a layman, simple as ourselves, set up his reason as the rule for what we are to read and what we must believe?" T.J.

At no place on the website in question do I see any indication that they solely and specifically deal with child sex predators. (Please point me to where you found this.) Further there is no mention of any offense against a minor anywhere in regards to the charges against Napoleon Murphy Brock that I could find. Further I still have no details as to when the charges stem from, who the victim(s) in the case were, if he went to trial or took a plea, etc. But he obviously isn't incarcerated at this time, as he just performed with The Grandmothers at Zappanale. So even if he is guilty, and he may be, it doesn't really matter as he has most likely paid his debt to society, and now gets to begin again.

Sorry, I know I'm supposed to engage in an involuntary programmed response, something along the lines of hatred, disgust, revulsion and murderous rage for the man. It's just not going to happen, perhaps I don't watch Nancy Grace and America's Most Wanted enough. Perhaps I just don't believe that any one thing is the entire summation of a human existence.

No one is expecting you to voice disgust, i've not seen anyone voice disgust yet. I've objectively shown what's on that site without giving any judgement or views of my own on it, i simply relayed information that was already widely available to anyone who wants to look.

I can't find the section that said the site specifically dealt with people who carry out offences against minors, so i'll withdraw that for now, but I did definitely see it in relation to that site and I believe the "Megan's Law" banner continually displayed at the top, is also in reference to this.

I'm surprised you think that the possibility of 2 counts of rape against a minor is nothing to worry about as he "has most likely paid is debt to society". Do you think that the victims feel great now that "society" has been repaid. Prison is a business like anything else and the only people who benefit from people being in jail are the investors who profit from prison. Still at least he gets his life back, the victims' lives will be ruined for good, but that's beside the point.

You seem to be going just a touch overboard in your analogies, i for one never watch television, so i'm unlikely to be swayed by nancy grace (whomever that is) or america's most wanted. Furthermore, I think in your assumption that anyone who assumes he's guilty is some sort of zealous lunatic with not enough imagination or guile to work things out for themselves is rather weird and just a touch insulting to anyone who has ever been effected by this sort of trauma, or anyone who has an ounce of intelligence.

Regardless of the supposed guilt or lack thereof, there's still the fact that 2 people (possibly minors) were raped by force and yet you're only concern is for the reputation of the accused, without the slightest concern for the victims. In fact, you've went as far as to suggest that it could be the result of any number of things except it being the truth.

Let's put something into perspective here. There is no chance of any allegation of rape getting anywhere near a court these days unless there is forensic evidence. So for that reason alone, I believe there must be at least some evidence because they would not put him on that site unless there was some. And in the possibility it has been a mistake, do you not think Napoleon Murphy Brock would be going out of his way to get his details taken off the site.....I don't believe for one minute that he won't know he's on the site, someone must have seen him on it. He'd be notified most likely that he's on it by the people that run it!

This is a government run database, it's not some angry parent's blog or some special interest group's site. And i find it hard to believe that anyone would be put on that site and kept there without a modicum of evidence. It would be a california lawyer's dream to have someone on that site who shouldn't be there, as they could sue the government for millions, especially someone who has had a long career in the entertainment industry and who could claim that it's had an effect on his livelihood.

So while i applaud your selfless vitrioling in defence of NMB, I don't agree with a single word of it for the qualitative reasons stated above. And furthermore, it's you and only you who is being melodramatic in relation to this topic.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests

You cannot post new topics in this forumYou cannot reply to topics in this forumYou cannot edit your posts in this forumYou cannot delete your posts in this forumYou cannot post attachments in this forum